Tag: war

Martin van Creveld has taught you this. I’ve repeated the warning over and over again. Now genetic science is making it indubitably clear that mass migration is not only war and replacement, but genetic genocide.

Since the beginning of human migration, the Iberian Peninsula—home of modern-day Spain and Portugal—has been a place where the cultures of Africa, Europe, and the Mediterranean have mingled.

In a new paper in the journal Science, a group of 111 population geneticists and archaeologists charted 8,000 years of genetics in the region. They paint a picture that shows plenty of genetic complexity, but that also hints at a single mysterious migration about 4,500 years ago that completely shook up ancient Iberians’ DNA.

The team searched DNA evidence for clues to how and when various populations became part of the Iberian Peninsula’s gene pool. They sequenced the genomes of 271 ancient Iberians, then combined that information with previously published data about 132 other ancient peninsula dwellers.

Beginning in the Bronze Age, the genetic makeup of the area changed dramatically. Starting in about 2,500 B.C., genes associated with people from the steppes near the Black and Caspian seas, in what is now Russia, can be detected in the Iberin gene pool. And from about 2,500 B.C. much of the population’s DNA was replaced with that of steppe people…. Though 60 percent of the region’s total DNA remained the same, the Y chromosomes of the inhabitants were almost entirely replaced by 2,000 B.C. That suggests a massive influx of men from the steppes, since Y chromosomes are carried only by men.

“It looks like the influence was very male dominated,” says Miguel Vilar, a genetic anthropologist who serves as senior program officer for the National Geographic Society.

Who were these men—and did they come in peace?

They obviously didn’t come in peace. They invaded the land, slaughtered the men, and raped the women. That’s what mass migration inevitably entails, and why it the large-scale movement of peoples is actually considerably WORSE than simple international war between nation-states.

Just ask the American Indian.

The senator is absolutely correct, which is why his observations on the New Zealand shootings have sparked such outrage among the reality-challenged:

A controversial federal MP has sparked outrage for blaming Islamic immigration for the Christchurch mosque shooting which has killed 49 people.

Independent Queensland senator Fraser Anning said while any form of violence could never be justified, the growing fear of the ‘increasing Muslim presence’ was behind the massacre.

‘The real cause of bloodshed on New Zealand streets today is the immigration program that allowed Muslim fanatics to migrate to New Zealand in the first place,’ he tweeted shortly after the Friday afternoon shootings.

Every mass movement of peoples has always ended in bloodshed, sooner or later. Why would anyone expect the current migration cycle to end any differently?

And this prediction is particularly apt: As always, left-wing politicians and the media will rush to claim that the causes of today’s shootings lie with gun laws or those who hold nationalist views but this is all cliched nonsense.

UPDATE: The shootings in New Zealand were almost certainly the first of the false flags everyone who has been paying attention has been anticipating. The paid shills are out HARD on this one trying to put out the fires being set by everyone who notices the highly cheesy nature of the so-called manifesto or the unlikely prospect of a very fit young Aussie who looks a lot like an SAS officer being inspired by a Norwegian to attack a mosque in New Zealand in order to defend gun rights in the United States.

Martin van Creveld warned you. I warned you. The history of the Islamic invasions of Europe and the reconquest of Spain warned you. The entire recorded history of the movement of peoples warned you. Of course, the inevitability of the historical trends is not going to even slow down the feigned media “shock and outrage” narrative that will greet the events in New Zealand that may be the beginning of Reconquista 2.0, the next phase in the conquest of the West, or simply a clumsy false flag designed to do anything from a) trigger war with Iran, b) justify the further suppression of inalienable rights, or c) derail the growing popularity of the nationalist right.

Two gunmen opened fire at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, at 1.40pm local time on Friday. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said 49 were killed. 41 were killed at Masjid Al Noor Mosque, seven at Linwood Masjid Mosque and one died at hospital.

48 people were rushed to hospital with gunshot wounds and 20 are in critical condition. One of the gunmen live-streamed the deadly attack on Facebook using a GoPro in footage too distressing to show. It was posted on a Facebook page belonging to Brenton Tarrant. It is understood the killer is an Australian-Brit who published a chilling 74-page manifesto before the rampage

Cops have arrested three men and a woman – with one found wearing a suicide vest. New Zealand Police commissioner Mike Bush said a man in his late twenties has been charged with murder and will appear in court tomorrow.

As I have written before, and will no doubt have to write again and again, the blood of the victims on both sides is on the hands of the evil politicians and activists who opened the borders of the nation-states of the West to foreign invaders. There is a reason Muslims refer to the lands outside the House of Submission as the Dar al-Harb, the House of War.

Dar al-Harab is a term classically referring to those countries where the Muslim law is not in force, in the matter of worship and the protection of the faithful and dhimmis. It is unclean by definition, and will not become clean until annexed to the House of Peace. Its denizens are either to be converted, killed or, if people of the book, tolerated as long as they pay the jizya.

So, don’t bother pretending to be shocked or upset. The bloodshed in Christchurch is what has always happened when rival civilizations clash as a result of one group of people moving into the territory of another group of people. The media never even pretends to shed any tears when dozens of Christians are regularly murdered in their churches in Pakistan, Egypt, and elsewhere in the Middle East. And if the brave men and women of the armed forces had simply defended their nations from Islamic invasion instead of massacring hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women, and children everywhere from Afghanistan to Somalia, ordinary men and women would feel no need to become resistance fighters in their own lands.

If, that is, anyone has actually done so, as there are more than a few distinctly false notes throughout the entire manifesto, which makes me very reluctant to accept the scenario at face value. The entire document felt very cut-and-pasted, and as if it had multiple authors, at least one of whom was trolling the reader.

UPDATE: Apparently option (c) was the correct answer.

The pathology of identity politics on the extreme right….
– Dr. Jordan B Peterson

Or much better yet, not at all. Bill Lind considers the latest neocon push for war with Iran:

Last week’s most important news event received remarkably little press.  According to the February 14 New York Times, shortly after landing in Poland for a major international conference, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu committed truth.

No sooner had he landed that the prime minister’s Twitter account announced “an open meeting with representatives of leading Arab countries, that are sitting down together with Israel in order to advance the common interest of war with Iran.”

In case anyone doubts that this was a case of committing truth, the Times reported that “An hour later, the Twitter posting was changed to ‘advance the common interest of combating Iran.’”

So Israel wants war with Iran, and so do several Arab states with loud voices in Washington, especially Saudi Arabia.  From an American perspective, the problem is that both the Israelis and the Saudis will want the United States to fight the war for them.

This promises to be the Iraq war all over again.  American neocons were major players then in devising a new strategy for the destruction of every Arab country that could be a threat to the Jewish state.  Iraq was first on the list.  But then, as now, America was supposed to do the fighting, take the casualties and pay the bill.  The neocons worked on a president who had little understanding of foreign policy (though Trump is a great deal brighter than W.) to do their bidding, and he fell for it.  The result was a disaster for America and the region (and, ironically, Israel).  We lost more than 5000 young Americans dead, tens of thousands wounded, trillions of dollars wasted, and the Iraqi state destroyed, to the benefit of Fourth Generation, non-state entities such as Al Qaeda and ISIS that are real threats to the U.S. and Israel, which Saddam’s Iraq was not.  We also destroyed the main regional power that was blocking Iran’s quest for regional dominance.

Now, we are supposed to make up for that blunder by going to war with Iran.  The result would likely be even worse.

When defeat is disastrous and victory arguably even worse, the wise move is to not go to war at all.

Even defense industry experts are beginning to acknowledge the gradual alteration in the balance of global military power as its planetary supremacy is observably slipping away from the US military:

The US keeps losing, hard, in simulated wars with Russia and China. Bases burn. Warships sink. But we could fix the problem for about $24 billion a year, one well-connected expert said, less than four percent of the Pentagon budget.

“In our games, when we fight Russia and China,” RAND analyst David Ochmanek said this afternoon, “blue gets its ass handed to it.” In other words, in RAND’s wargames, which are often sponsored by the Pentagon, the US forces — colored blue on wargame maps — suffer heavy losses in one scenario after another and still can’t stop Russia or China — red — from achieving their objectives, like overrunning US allies.

No, it’s not a Red Dawn nightmare scenario where the Commies conquer Colorado. But losing the Baltics or Taiwan would shatter American alliances, shock the global economy, and topple the world order the US has led since World War II.

Granted, the RAND analysts have serious incentives to find problems to which they can sell the answers. But that doesn’t necessarily indicate that the vulnerabilities they describe do not exist, especially when they are describing scenarios very similar to what other observers have pointed out.

I don’t believe there is anything that can be done that is going to seriously slow the growth of regional power at the expense of the global power, especially because I believe we have already passed the point of peak globalism, for at least this cycle and possibly for good.

I suspect this is why the neocons and other Israeli imperialists are so desperate for war, almost any war, these days despite the American public’s complete lack of interest in waging any additional ones. They are clearly aware that the USA is only going to be less powerful, and less capable of military intervention around the world, in the future.

Perhaps you may recall the discussion of when and where the late-stage imperial US military is going to meet its inevitable debacle that finally signifies to the world that the empire is fully in decline. This proposed scenario would appear to be an excellent candidate in the unlikely event it should come to pass.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says Israel is prepared to throw the power of its naval force – and urges the world to join in – to block the Iranian oil shipments circumventing unilaterally imposed US sanctions against Tehran.

“Iran is trying to bypass the sanctions on it through the covert smuggling of petroleum via the sea. As these attempts expand, the navy will have a more important role in efforts to block these Iranian actions,” Netanyahu said at a navy cadets’ graduation ceremony in Haifa on Wednesday.

Failing to explain how exactly Israel’s relatively small naval force would impose the suggested blockade against Iranian oil tankers, Netanyahu only emphasized that Israeli sailors are well-trained and adept at carrying out sea missions against adversaries.

The scenario would be bad enough if it was only the Israeli Navy putting itself at risk of being sunk, but there is no way the Israelis would make such a move without expecting the US Navy to come to its rescue once it found itself in well over its head.

And getting into a green-water naval war would arguably be the worst possible scenario for the dominant blue-water navy and conjures up images of the French Navy at the Battle of the Nile, only in this case, it would be the sea power that would be at a serious disadvantage from land-based missiles and torpedoes despite its air superiority.

Remember when I said the USA is going to lose its next major war? This USAF general is underlining my case:

Improving diversity and acceptance across the Air Force isn’t just about being politically correct, it’s a “warfighting imperative,” USAF Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein said Friday.

Speaking to a room packed full of airmen at AFA’s Air Warfare Symposium, Goldfein said for himself and many leaders across the service, it can be hard to recognize issues other airmen face. These leaders need to accept that “we have blinders on as leaders,” and need to reach out to airmen from all backgrounds, races, genders, etc., to point out ways to improve.

“The only way we can see that is to surround ourselves and build teams in ways that others can point them out for us,” Goldfein said, adding that there needs to be a “big tent” culture of acceptance in the Air Force.

The decline and fall of the US empire is going to amuse and mystify historians for centuries, if not millennia. I’m feel as if I’m beginning to understand how Juvenal felt before writing his classic satires.

I don’t see this shortage of sailors being a problem that adding twenty-five thousand women, transvestites, and low-IQ immigrants to the Navy can’t fix:

The Navy is short about 6,200 sailors to meet its at-sea requirements for its current force, and that gap could grow as the service adds new ships to the fleet, the head of U.S. Fleet Forces Command told a House panel on Tuesday.

Those sailors will, in part, be used to plus-up crew numbers on each surface ship after the Navy had previously gone to a lower “optimal manning” crew size to save personnel costs, Adm. Chris Grady told a combined hearing before the House Armed Services readiness and seapower and projection forces subcommittees.

“As we sailed through that environment, we recognized that that was too few, and indeed since 2012 the number on a DDG was 240; in 2017 it’s about 270 and will be funded back up very close to the original size of a guided-missile destroyer in 2023 at about 318,” he said. “Personnel is expensive, and that number did not work out well, and we’re now buying back to a larger size crew complement for a destroyer.”

According to the written testimony from Grady and U.S. Pacific Fleet Commander Adm. John Aquilino submitted for the hearing, the missing sailors are from the mid-grade and senior enlisted ranks that will take years to train and place in the fleet. The pair indicated there wasn’t a specific set of billets they needed to fill with the new sailors but rather that they were needed across platforms at sea.

That number could grow as the Navy adds ships to the fleet and personnel needs rise, Grady said. Growing sailors fast enough to the level of technical ability to operate the proposed 355 ships is set to be a major challenge for the service and a key focus of the Navy’s ongoing surface reform effort.

Acute manning problems were found to be a factor in the fatal collisions of USS Fitzgerald (DDG-62) and USS John McCain (DDG-56). For example, Fitzgerald did not have lookouts on the bridge wing immediately before the crash, and sailors aboard McCain weren’t qualified to use the helm controls which contributed to its collision.

I wonder how many of those expanded destroyer crews of 318 are going to be pregnant and unable for deployment when the ships go to sea? Or, is the real number required 240, but so many sailors are unable to deploy that they need a nominal crew of 318 in order to fill the real number needed for the mission?

Once more, we see that the conspiracy theory of history tends to be more accurate than the mainstream version:

Former Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has for the first time divulged explosive secrets about how the United States supported ISIS and intentionally allowed the Takfiri terror outfit to gain power in Iraq so that Washington could creep back into the Arab country.

Maliki, who served as PM between 2006 and 2014, told a local TV station on Sunday that the administration of former US President Barack Obama had played a key role in the creation of ISIS by allowing the terrorist group to overrun Iraqi territories.

According to the former premier, in 2013, the US provided Iraq with intelligence and aerial imagery pinpointing ISIS militants who had lined up behind Iraqi borders in Syria in large groups, waiting to cross into Iraq after what they thought was going to be the imminent fall of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

Maliki said back then Baghdad had no fighter jets capable of bombing the terrorist positions and the Iraqi combat helicopters did not have the range to orchestrate an attack. So naturally, Baghdad turned to Washington for help and asked the Obama administration to provide the Iraqi air force with “one or two” fighter jets under the 2008 security agreement between the two sides.

Washington, however, turned down the requests and advised the Iraqi government to ask Jordan for help but that was a no-go as there was no military cooperation agreement between Baghdad and Amman at the time.

Nevertheless, the Iraqi army’s 7th Division was sent to eradicate the terrorists without air support and made some progress before landing in a deadly terrorist siege that killed its commander and nearly dismantled the whole division.

The former Iraqi PM said America’s support for ISIS did not end there as Washington proceeded to stop all supplies of helicopter parts and other military equipment to Iraq and halted a contract to sell Iraq F-16 attack aircraft even though Baghdad had paid for them in advance.

As usual, all one has to do is wait a few years and the official story almost invariably mutates. For example, did you know that despite the headlines at the time, there was no recession in 2001? Just review the current BEA statistics and you’ll see that it’s been adjusted out of existence.

We may already be witnessing the US Navy’s retreat from its 65-year history of naval supremacy on the high seas:

Amidst rising anxiety over whether the US Navy’s thousand-foot-long flagships could evade Chinese missiles in a future war, the Pentagon has decided to cut the aircraft carrier fleet from 11 today to 10. By retiring the Nimitz-class supercarrier USS Truman at least two decades early, rather than refueling its nuclear reactor core in 2024 as planned, the military would save tens of billions on overhaul and operations costs that it could invest in other priorities. But the proposal, part of the 2020-2024 budget plan due out mid-March, is sure to inspire outrage on Capitol Hill.

Sure, it’s possible that these are just the usual military budget games, but I suspect that the Navy’s long-terms strategists are beginning to come to terms with the fact that the aircraft carrier is simply becoming too vulnerable to be worth the concentration of resources that it represents.

The age of the battleship came to an end with World War II. The age of the carrier will officially come to an end with the next conflict between the United States and a major regional sea power.